Posted on
When you find out your son or daughter is getting a divorce, your first thought will often be about their children; your grandchildren.  How will the children be affected by all of this?  And how can you help; or avoid hurting the situation? During the 31 years I have been working with divorcing families, I have seen situations where the grandparents have really helped their children and grandchildren though a difficult time.  Sadly however, I have witnessed far more situations where they grandparents have, without realizing it, actually make the divorce more difficult for their grandchildren. You may be wondering; how can this be?  What type of person would actually make the divorce more difficult for their grandchildren?  Believe it or not, it can happen to the very best grandparents without them even realizing it.  Here are the two common mistakes that grandparents make:
  1. Facilitating a War by Creating a War Chest. Divorce is expensive, and your children may turn to you to help with the legal fees. If you have the capacity to help, it would seem, at least on the surface, to be the right thing to do to provide them with funding, at least in the form of a loan. While the financial assistance is sometimes helpful, sometimes it can actually add to the conflict. The thing that damages children the most is generally the conflict that so often happens when one or both parents are angry, sad or scared. If your children have enough funding, they can sometimes carry out the conflict through attorneys. If their funds are limited, the may be forced to look past the emotions and find solutions.  When I litigated divorces (something I can no longer stomach), some of the nastiest custody fights were funded by grandparents. All of the grandparents thought they were helping out their grandchildren. Usually they only perpetuated a fight.
  2. “Supporting” your child by reaffirming the evilness of their spouse. The emotions of divorce create distortions. The wonderful son-in-law that you heard about for the past 15 years, is now portrayed by your daughter as a monster. As you hear the stories of how badly he is behaving, you are aghast and quickly run to her support by suddenly remembering things that you never really liked about him. It may be that your son-in-law was not as great as you thought; and it may be that the divorce is bringing out his worst behavior. However, it is possible, (maybe even likely) that you are getting a distorted picture of this person and, adding to the distortion, (which can happen instinctively) may cause damage to the only father your grandchildren will ever know.
So, how do you avoid making these mistakes?  One way is to encourage your children to fully explore their divorce processes, so that they can be supported by attorneys and other professionals who will help them resist the distortions and the war mentality.  To learn more about these options, go to www.collaborativelaw.org  or www.divorchoice.com.
Posted on
467982755Potential divorce clients often ask, how much does a collaborative divorce cost? Great question, it differs with each case and is dependent on clients and their level of conflict regardless of process. The more conflict a couple brings to any divorce process the more expensive it will be. Bottom line, conflict is expensive. Butting heads together to argue positions vs. putting heads together to solve problems will always increase costs.  In a collaborative divorce, we focus on putting heads together which should decrease costs. As a financial neutral in the collaborative process, I have given this cost question serious thought.  I wrestle with how you define cost.  Do we measure cost only in terms of dollars and cents or is there something beyond the almighty dollar?  I think the latter. I remember a couple who owned a business that I worked with in a collaborative divorce.  By simply suggesting an alternative to using retirement fund money (client plan) to pay off a rather large debt, I was able to save them about $9,000 in income taxes.  I seriously doubt anyone other than a well-trained financial professional would have noticed this. What about the cost savings of better-adjusted children of divorce because of their parents taking a higher road with less tension and conflict allowing both parents to effectively co-parent to create and environment where children are not placed in the middle of parental conflict?  What about the cost of the stress and delays that typically occur with a traditional court based divorce?  How do you place a number on the cost of destroyed relationships with spouses, children, extended family members such as in-laws and friends?  How can one put a dollar value on these? Theoretically, a collaborative divorce should cost less.  Attorney involvement in a collaborative divorce is typically less than in a traditional court based model.  This occurs since other professionals, usually at lower hourly rates, provide many services historically provided by attorneys. Some attorneys choose not to become collaborative divorce practitioners because of this.  Some traditional court based attorneys will say they do not believe that it is in the best interest of their client to have to withdraw from representing their client if the case does not settle in the collaborative process.  The withdrawal provision if a case should go to court, is a key feature of collaborative divorce because it places everyone’s focus and interests, attorneys and clients, on finding solutions that take into account the highest priorities of both spouses and their children instead of arguing positions ad infinitum.  This committed agreement for attorneys and clients to settle is, in my opinion, a good thing for divorcing spouses.  It helps provide the framework for a less costly divorce and as I said earlier, I am not talking only about money. One of my goals working with couples or individuals is to reduce their divorce costs whenever and wherever we can so the family can keep more of its hard-earned money.  One very simple illustration of how a financial neutral helps lower costs is in gathering financial information necessary for any divorce.  It works like this.  The financial neutral gathers All the financial documents from the clients that attorneys will ultimately need such as ALL assets and liability account statements including bank and credit card statements, non-retirement investments and savings, pension and retirement accounts, real estate documents, business documents if any, tax returns, pay check stubs etc. The financial neutral then, organizes and presents all of this information to both attorneys.  Contrast this with each client having to provide all of this information to each of their attorneys.  Attorneys usually have the highest hourly rates.  Rather than paying two attorneys the couple pays, one financial professional, to perform this function.  This one-step in the process can easily save a couple up to two thousand dollars. When minor children are involved, a neutral child specialist will meet with the parents to help them create parenting plans that are in the best interest of the child.  The child specialist usually conducts these meetings without an attorney present. A neutral coach, when engaged by a couple, meets with the clients without attorneys to facilitate communication plans throughout the divorce process and looking ahead in the couple’s relationship post divorce. The child specialist and neutral coaches typically have the lowest hourly rates in the process of all professionals.  Sometimes clients choose not to hire a neutral coach.  In my experience, having a coach on board can help decrease tension and improve communication between spouses during the process.  Less tension and conflict should lead to lower cost and more importantly stronger relationships post divorce. Well, I really have not given you a definitive answer on how much a collaborative divorce costs, because I cannot.  Every couple and family is unique.  Couples themselves determine, often unconsciously, how much their divorce will cost.  Cost is directly a function of the level of conflict they bring into and maintain throughout the process. Ultimately, I think it boils down to what the couple wants.  If they want a largely attorney driven process and someone else to make decisions for them about their children and their future then perhaps the more traditional court based process is for them.  If on the other hand the couple wants to have less attorney involvement, make decisions for themselves and their children instead of someone else deciding then a collaborative divorce may be a better choice. If I could leave you with anything from this post, it would be to remember theoretically a collaborative divorce should cost less and that cost is more than just money.  You control your journey and your destination.  Choose wisely.
Posted on
Remember that old rhyme from childhood, “First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes a baby in a baby carriage”? Some things are just part of life and are simply inevitable. People will fall in love. People will join together in relationships. These are all positive, great things. Unfortunately, people—whether gay or straight—all have struggles in life and relationships. Inevitably, when Minnesota granted same-sex couples the right to marry, it was inevitable that same-sex divorces would happen, just as opposite-sex divorces happen. Gay couples who married before marriage was legal in Minnesota—whether they became married in another state or, because Minnesota borders with Canada, often in another country—may now face the need to obtain a divorce. If a gay couple separates and does not intend to share their lives together going forward, they should strongly consider finalizing their separation by obtaining a legal divorce in Minnesota. I have run into Minnesota gay couples who had no idea that they are now legally married. This viewpoint may be especially common for those couples who married in Canada years ago and then separated long before marriage was legal in Minnesota. For better or worse (pun intended), those couples continue to be married and need to divorce in order to clear up the division of their marital assets and debts. If they have children in common by adoption they need to determine their rights and responsibilities as to those children.  Even if there is a non-joint child, which is common in same-sex marriages, the “non-parent” may be able to establish legally enforceable rights to visitation because of their significant connection with that child. Again, this is even though they are not legally “their” child.  Because marriage creates an interest in real property (houses, etc.), the residence that the couple lived in or any other land and any mortgages (and any other debts) need to be addressed in the divorce. Before same-sex marriage was legal in Minnesota, it was difficult for same-sex couples to form legally enforceable rights and responsibilities related to a committed relationship. Perhaps that is why some same-sex couples have a hard time believing that they now must use the legal system to fully end their marriage relationship. By the way, I understand that Brangelina (Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, for those who don’t follow popular culture!) had declared they wouldn’t get married until same sex couples everywhere could get married…but apparently they couldn’t wait, because they were recently married. Well, my theory is that they had to wait until Minnesota made same-sex marriage legal (it just took a year to plan the wedding)! Without getting divorced, a gay couple may find out later, to their surprise, that one of the pair is making a claim to part of the other’s retirement account or is holding up the sale or transfer of property that was owned during the marriage, because simply living separately doesn’t resolve all these issues. I expect that many same-sex couples will be unpleasantly surprised later in life that when they hear that they have to share their retirement with a partner from long ago that they never intended to share their retirement account with. Or, an inheritance may be held up–or never received as expected by a son or daughter–because of a claim for all or a share of the estate of a deceased same-sex spouse. These are topics that are addressed well in the Collaborative Process because they can be approached from a perspective of respect and honoring of the love that the couple previously shared, while laying a foundation for future separate lives. Now that same-sex marriage is legal Minnesota, same-sex couples may likely find that the Collaborative Divorce process provides the proper legal, financial and other professional supports needed for disentangling the various legal rights and responsibilities incident to ending their legal marriage.
Posted on
140196937Parties going through a divorce need to understand that advocacy in the “rights-based” Court Model and advocacy in the “interest-based” Collaborative Model are different; and advocacy in each of these models feels different as well.  Bear with me while I examine Advocacy in the “rights-based” Court Model in Part I in preparation for discussing advocacy in the “interest-based” Collaborative Model in Part II followed by the “power of neutrality” in Part III.   Trust me, this is interesting. In a rights-based model, “rights” are independent standards of fairness or legitimacy that are formally established in law or contract.  Usually different rights or entitlements are at stake in a particular case.  Here, each party and their attorney is playing to the decision-maker, e.g., the judge, or playing to a prediction of what the decision-maker would decide based on application of the law to the facts of the case.

Diagram - Advocacy in Rights-based Model 082814

In this case, neither party cares much about the other party’s point of view.  What matters is what the judge thinks or is predicted to think.  “Rights-based” advocacy focuses on winning and losing and defending positions, and frequently emphasizes past events.  The relationship between the parties is likely to become more adversarial, the parties becoming opponents interacting in an accusatory atmosphere.  While advocacy in this model is hard on the problem, it is also hard on the parties. A rights-based model can sometimes accomplish what an interest-based model cannot—bring an end to the divorce.  There will always be parties and problems that cannot be resolved without a 3rd party decision-maker making a final decision or threatening to make a final decision for the parties.  But for many families, a rights-based procedure is not necessary.   A rights-based procedure should be a last resort rather than a first resort. That was pretty interesting, right?  In Part II, I will examine advocacy in the “interest-based” Collaborative Model and how the removal of the 3rd party decision-maker makes all the difference.  In Part III, the power of neutrality is shown to be the secret ingredient to advocacy in the “interest-based” Collaborative Model.
Posted on
186765081As I listened to the appalling news out of Ferguson, MO, last week, I was especially struck by two things: First, a veteran police officer, a retired chief of a municipal department, shared an observation that his officers made during unrest in his city, that when they were deployed in riot gear, officers invariably discovered that the situation became riotous.  But when they met protestors wearing only their regular uniforms, they were able to talk to them and defuse many situations. Secondly, early last week, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon put State Troopers under the command of Capt. Ronald S. Johnson, who grew up in the area, in charge of the police effort in Ferguson.  Capt. Johnson, as pictured on the front page of the August 15th N.Y. Times, wore only his regular Summer uniform.  He walked with protestors in the streets; he listened to them explain long-standing grievances.  And the temperature in Ferguson cooled perceptibly–before additional tear gas and rubber bullets reignited passions. I am not a cop.  But the retired police chief–and Capt. Johnson–and I–all know from long experience that you will find trouble if you go looking for it. Fortunately, my experiences as a divorce lawyer lack both rubber bullets and tear gas, but they are accompanied by strong emotions, usually expressed in the denigration of my client’s spouse.  My client recites how dishonest, abusive, or uncaring the spouse is; how neglectful or clueless he or she is.  It’s the opposite of the old lyric, “lookin’ for gold in a silver mine.”  If those negative emotions bubble over, they’re invariably met with–SURPRISE!–the same feelings on the other side! And the case becomes even more contentious.  The bigger waste, overall, is that the couple seems to believe that the family court system cares about this emotion.  Apparently they believe that if the fight becomes bitter enough, someone will “win”.  These folks could have been the inspiration for Elton John’s lyrics in “Honky Cat”:          “It’s like trying to find gold in a silver mine. It’s like trying to drink whiskey from a bottle of wine.” Collaborative Process was conceived as a problem-solving exercise, based on a belief that husbands and wives might put their children’s welfare before their own.  When I can get my client to take that leap of faith, s/he is often astounded to discover that, because they’re not spending the time fighting, both of them are able to make decisions that directly benefit the entire family.  When my client starts out believing that their spouse also wants to complete the process and care for their children, they discover–SURPRISE!–that the spouses do.  And when that happens, they’re more willing to listen to the variety of ways in which that could occur.  Time and energy  are now spent devising productive ways to reorganize their family. If you’re looking for peace by waging war, don’t expect to find it.  If, on the other hand, you start out waging peace . . .
Posted on
186858906How to provide financially for children after divorce has been a much-discussed topic for decades. Courts have traditionally used child support guidelines established by state government to calculate a monthly payment from one parent to the other. The Minnesota guideline child support calculator incorporates a number of variables, including both parents’ incomes, number of children, parenting time percentages, and children’s medical and day care costs, in arriving at a monthly payment amount. While statutory formulas produce a number, they don’t always resolve the issue. Many unanswered questions may remain, such as: “Is summer camp included in my child support payment?” “Do I have to contribute toward dance lessons on top of my child support?” “Our child needs private tutoring … does my ex have to pay half?” “Who pays for hockey equipment and ice time?” Ambiguity often results in conflict. Some couples return to court again and again to try to resolve questions like these. The emotional and financial costs of repeated court appearances add up in a hurry. The Collaborative divorce process takes a different approach toward paying the children’s direct and indirect expenses. Parents compile a list of their kids’ direct expenses (clothing, haircuts, school lunches, daycare, summer camps, extracurricular activities, etc.) and then discuss options for paying these expenses. Some couples decide to fund a joint children’s account to be used solely for enumerated expenses. Others divide the expenses with mom paying some and dad paying some. Others decide to use the guideline calculator, spelling out how any additional expenses will be covered. Indirect expenses (housing and food) are included in each parent’s budget and are usually part of a more general discussion about support. Collaborative support agreements typically include periodic reviews allowing for adjustments as parents’ incomes and the children’s needs change. Plans like these can preemptively avoid repeated unpleasant discussions in the years following divorce. If you are interested in learning more about the Collaborative process, please visit The Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota’s website.
Posted on
464714163Peace is possible though we are surrounded by high conflict. In the recent words of former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, “The world is a mess.”  Messiness occurs when people are unable or unwilling to resolve differences without wars of words or weapons.  This occurs not only globally but also on a personal scale.  And for all the extraordinary human costs of violent conflict, the most deeply distressing is its impact on children. The end of a marriage is not unlike the breaking up of a country based on sectarian differences.  Is it possible to disconnect without civil war?  Yes, but one must be mindful of the path one is choosing, and deliberately opt to not do battle.  Though sometimes complicated, peaceful resolutions are possible if the focus remains the safety and wellbeing of children. I do not believe conflict is inevitable, because for every cause of conflict there is an inverse possibility.  In our day-to-day lives, we can choose a path of peace.  We can elect to follow The Four Agreements as defined by Don Miguel Ruiz in his book by the same name, and use these principles to help us resolve our differences:
  1. I will be impeccable with my word.
  2. I will not personalize what the other person says, does, thinks or believes.
  3. I will make no assumptions.
  4. I will do my best every day with the energy I have been given.
In Collaborative Team Practice, parents who are getting unmarried can draw from sources of support for the emotional, financial, parenting and legal issues that are involved.  Parents remain in charge of their own outcomes, but are given tools to keep the process as respectful as possible, thereby setting the stage for child-centered co-parenting.  The world your children will inhabit is in the future.  May it be a peaceful one.
Posted on

179557103One of the most valuable outcomes of Collaborative Team Practice for many families is how respectfully the process helps prepare parents for effective co-parenting.  Lee Eddison, a very experienced neutral coach in Collaborative Team Practice, aptly describes this as a transition from We (a married couple) to a different kind of We (co-parents).

In Collaborative Team Practice, the expertise to make this transition is available from two mental health professionals on the team, the neutral child specialist and the neutral coach.  The neutral child specialist offers a child-inclusive process to assist parents in the creation of a developmentally responsive Parenting Plan.  The Parenting Plan lays an important foundation for effective-co-parenting with detailed agreements about decision making; communication; parenting expectations, routines and guidelines; and parenting time.  This foundation is considerably strengthened when parents also create a Relationship Plan with their neutral coach.

The Relationship Plan is a set of clear and specific agreements about how parents can communicate effectively and resolve potential or actual conflicts in a productive manner once they have completed their divorce or separation and are on their own.  The Relationship Plan is not a list of cookie cutter recommendations or generic advice, but is specifically tailored to the unique needs and concerns of each family.  

Included in the Relationship Plan are agreements about necessary boundaries to define safe emotional, physical and communication space for co-parenting.The neutral coach helps parents be specific about what words and behaviors from a co-parent would feel respectful and supportive, what could easily trigger negative emotions, and what to do if negative emotions are triggered.  The Relationship Plan helps parents anticipate and prepare for a number of sensitive and potentially complicated interpersonal situations that frequently arise after a divorce or break up.Creating a Relationship Plan also provides an opportunity for parents to articulate and build on their own and their co-parent’s strengths.

In my experience as a neutral child specialist,  parents who invest the time and resources to create a Relationship Plan with their neutral coach have prepared themselves as fully as possible for their lifelong relationship as co-parents.  On behalf of their children, what could possibly be more valuable than that?
Posted on
138041606Starting a divorce can be difficult, particularly if your spouse believes the marriage can be saved. How you have this discussion may make a major difference in your life, particularly if you have children. In my thirty years of working with divorcing clients, I have found that avoiding mistakes at the very beginning of the process is crucial to the future of your family. The most common mistake is moving ahead without being fully prepared. Here is a quick guide to the type of preparation that I believe will make the most difference.
  1. Make sure you clearly explore your reconciliation options. Before you start down the path toward divorce, make sure that you are doing the right thing. This is important for you, and your children and will help your spouse become more accepting of the divorce if that is what ultimately needs to happen. There are many new ways to explore the divorce decision, including discernment counseling which is designed to help you determine whether your marriage can be saved. To learn more, go to the Doherty Relationship Institute website
  2. Make sure you understand the various options for how to divorce. There are many different ways to move ahead with divorce, including Collaborative Divorce and meditation. There are many good professionals who will explain all of the options, without charge. To learn more, go to www.collaboratiavelaw.org. or www.divorcechoice.com.
  3. Once you have chosen a method of moving forward, carefully plan the way of telling your spouse about the divorce. If there is any danger of abuse, make sure you consult with experienced professionals to make sure that you are aware of the safest possible method. If there is no danger of physical abuse, but have significant concerns about possible verbal abuse, make sure that you are in a public place so that you can leave if things get uncomfortable. If possible, consider having a counselor, clergy member or mutually trusted friend or family member present during this important discussion.
  4. Focus on the “Big Picture” and your long term goals.  Sometimes divorce can create a “crisis mentality” that can cause people to lose perspective on what really matters. Focusing only on the issues that feel urgent can displace the need to focus on what is truly important  such as the well-being of your children or your general health.
 
Posted on
182021502The Collaborative divorce process is one of many ways to divorce. It’s not for everyone. So how do you know whether it is right for you and your spouse or partner? Here are a few questions to help you decide:
  • Do you want your children to be in the center rather than in the middle?
  • Do you want your lawyer to be a wise counselor rather than a hired gun?
  • Are you willing to be in the same room with your spouse or partner?
  • Are you able to speak for yourself and articulate your own goals and interests?
  • Are you open to solutions that respect both your and your spouse’s interests?
  • Do you want to focus on future solutions rather than past disagreements?
  • Do you want a comfortable co-parenting relationship with your former spouse?
  • Are you willing to experience and live with some discomfort at times during your divorce?
  • Do you want solutions that take into consideration the uniqueness of your family?
  • Do you want to model healthy dispute resolution for your children, friends and family?
  • Do you want to be able to look back on your divorce and feel good about both the outcome and how you handled yourself during the process?
If you answered “no” to any of these questions, another, more traditional divorce process may be a better choice for you. Collaborative divorce is best-suited for couples who understand the value of divorcing well. How you divorce greatly impacts your children’s well-being and your own ability to move forward in life without resentment. If you answered “yes” to these questions, the Collaborative divorce process may be a good choice for you. To find out more, go to www.collaborativelaw.org and contact a Collaborative professional.